From: | Mladen Gogala <mladen(dot)gogala(at)vmsinfo(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "david(at)lang(dot)hm" <david(at)lang(dot)hm>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>, Vitalii Tymchyshyn <tivv00(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Slow count(*) again... |
Date: | 2011-02-01 23:44:17 |
Message-ID: | 4D489AD1.1010105@vmsinfo.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-performance |
On 2/1/2011 6:03 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Whether or not it's bad application design, it's ubiquitous, and we
> should make it work as best we can, IMNSHO. This often generates
> complaints about Postgres, and if we really plan for world domination
> this needs to be part of it.
There are many other things to fix first. One of them would be optimizer
decisions when a temp table is involved. I would also vote for wait
event interface, tracing and hints, much rather than speeding up
count(*). World domination will not be achieved by speeding up count(*),
it will be achieved by providing overall performance akin to what the
player who has already achieved the world domination. I believe that the
company is called "Oracle Corp." or something like that?
--
Mladen Gogala
Sr. Oracle DBA
1500 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
(212) 329-5251
http://www.vmsinfo.com
The Leader in Integrated Media Intelligence Solutions
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Samuel Gendler | 2011-02-02 03:13:38 | Re: [HACKERS] Slow count(*) again... |
Previous Message | Mladen Gogala | 2011-02-01 23:21:04 | Re: [PERFORM] Slow count(*) again... |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2011-02-01 23:50:12 | Re: Any experience using "shake" defragmenter? |
Previous Message | Mark Kirkwood | 2011-02-01 23:37:30 | Re: Bloat issue on 8.3; autovac ignores HOT new pages? |